[Lnc-business] Addressing some false statements

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Your complaints are against a caucus email which was not authored by anyone
on the LNC.  I wrote to all the people who wrote us offering to speak on
the phone primarily to clear up the fact pattern.

Your rewriting of the history of the contract is duly noted.  You initially
refused to sign any contract (and still haven’t).  Your justification on
the liquidated damages clause is a late added justification.  You could
have added all that in earlier meetings of the CoC but chose not to and
then blamed other people for your refusal.  At one CoC meeting discussing
the contract you stayed silent and then left abruptly.

Your threats above are also very inappropriate when speaking as the chair,
a habit you keep engaging in.

If you want that freedom, you should resign.  Until then you need to
maintain the impartiality required of a presiding officer and stop
threatening people.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 11:39 AM Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> There are a number of false statements circulating on social media and
> among members of this board. While this email will be of no help to those
> LNC members who have said I am dishonest and acting in bad faith, it may be
> of some use to people who have not yet sunk that low.
>
> Let's begin with ones from an email that an internal caucus sent to all of
> their members:
>
> “I’m sure most of you know that current LNC Chair Nick Sarwark tried to
> kill the in-person Orlando convention during the online presidential
> nomination proceedings over Memorial Day weekend.”
>
> False. I successfully presided over my third convention as Chair, working
> through obstruction and delay to get through the nomination of President
> and Vice President. When that work was over, I took the opportunity to let
> the body know that I would not preside over the second sitting, and that if
> they wanted to select a replacement, they could do so. Since that was a
> statement on the issue of whether to adjourn immediately or take up the
> election of Chair, I passed the gavel to Mr. Merced. Even had the Chair
> election been taken up, it would not have cancelled a second sitting.
>
> “What you may not know is that he has since said that he refuses to take
> part in an in-person convention and refused to sign the contract with the
> host hotel.”
>
> First, I will attend the second sitting of the convention in Orlando and
> will participate as a delegate from New Hampshire. The rest of my family
> will not be coming to Orlando because our country is still in the midst of
> an infectious pandemic and our family has chosen to minimize the exposure
> of ourselves and others to air travel and large meetings.
>
> Second, I refused to sign a contract with a $105K liquidated damages
> provision because it presented a great risk to the Libertarian Party. Once
> a contract that removed that provision, reduced the room rate by another
> $20 per night for our members, and lowered the required hotel rooms (though
> keeping a larger block available), I tried to move quickly to execute it.
>
> The four LNC members of the Convention Oversight Committee then attempted
> to put in provisions damaging to the Libertarian Party, in breach of their
> fiduciary duties and over the objection of the two people who have to
> approve a contract of that size under the policy manual, myself and Mr.
> Hall.  The provisions they urgently decided had to be in the contract were
> both ones that would cause a seven-day delay in the event of an emergency
> that required cancellation, because it would require approval of the whole
> LNC, which is not possible in a period shorter than an email vote or
> electronic meeting. There is no argument that these provisions put the
> Libertarian Party in a better position, they were designed to increase the
> risk of cancellation.
>
> “He also removed Dan Hayes, chair of the Convention Oversight Committee,
> from that committee for not sharing Sarwark’s views on an in-person
> convention.”
>
> Mr. Hayes was removed based on a number of factors, some of which were in
> my email announcing his removal. He has been personally abusive to
> colleagues and members of the Libertarian Party staff, which combined with
> his negotiating against the best interest of the Libertarian Party and
> taking weeks to finish a contract that should have been ready to sign at
> the first sitting showed that he is less effective in the role than Ms.
> Ryan, who successfully produced the Orlando convention without screaming or
> yelling at the rest of the members of her committee.
>
> “But in the meantime, Sarwark added a clause to the contract that would
> allow him to cancel the convention unilaterally, and then instructed a
> staff member to sign that contract, resulting in two different contracts
> being sent back to the hotel.”
>
> There was no clause added by myself or at my direction to the contract
> approved by our Special Counsel, approved by myself, and approved by the
> hotel. The contract transmitted by the Secretary had four clauses added to
> it the day before the contract was due by the four LNC members of the
> Convention Oversight Committee, clauses that were not ever present in any
> of the versions of the contract they had insisted was “ready to sign.”
> Going from having a vote to force someone to sign a contract with excessive
> risk to trying desperately to stop me from signing a much improved contract
> without a poison pill is tough to do in less than 24 hours, but Mr.
> Goldstein, Ms. Mattson, Ms. Adams, and Ms. Bilyeu moved very quickly.
>
> To clear up a legal misunderstanding, getting the $105K liquidated damages
> clause removed does not make cancellation free of risk or cost to the
> Libertarian Party. It means that the hotel would have to show what their
> actual damages are in the case of a cancellation. If a hurricane hits, it's
> better for us to be on the hook for the actual cost of cancellation, not a
> $105,000. Reducing the risk for the party is the fiduciary duty we all have
> to the party, which is why it was so confusing to me to see two other
> officers of this board try to increase the risk to the party by signing a
> contract that increased the risk to the party.
>
> “There is now a motion from Harlos before the LNC, with six co-sponsors, to
> suspend Sarwark so we can go ahead with the planned convention without
> further roadblocks.”
>
> Let me state clearly that the changes I made to the Convention Oversight
> Committee membership are to make that committee work more efficiently to
> make this convention a success. Mr. Rosen called me on the day the contract
> was executed to reiterate his commitment to having this exceed even our
> highest expectations, a sentiment I reciprocated in our conversation. It's
> no secret that I think a mass in-person gathering during a pandemic is
> stupid. But as long as I'm Chair, if the delegates decide to do something
> stupid, it's my duty to help them do the stupid thing as efficiently and
> with as little damage as possible.
>
> My last point, which I will place in all capital letters just to make sure
> nobody misses this truth:
>
> I DID NOT INTEND TO CANCEL THE CONTRACT WHEN NEGOTIATING IT, WHEN EXECUTING
> IT, OR AT ANY POINT PRIOR TO THE SECOND SITTING IN ORLANDO.
>
> I've been exceedingly disappointed at the number of people on this LNC who
> have my email and phone number, who know how to ask a question, who chose
> and continue to choose to believe lies about my actions and intentions and
> can't summon the human decency to ask me directly. My disappointment with
> the behavior on this LNC will be channeled as a delegate, as it was in
> 2012.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> Nick
>
-- 

*In Liberty,*

* Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
(part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *